7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Should women aged 70–74 be invited to participate in screening mammography? A report on two Australian community juries

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To elicit informed views from Australian women aged 70–74 regarding the acceptability of ceasing to invite women their age to participate in government-funded mammography screening (BreastScreen).

          Design

          Two community juries held in 2017.

          Setting

          Greater Sydney, a metropolis of 4.5 million people in New South Wales, Australia.

          Participants

          34 women aged 70–74 with no personal history of breast cancer, recruited by random digit dialling and previously randomly recruited list-based samples.

          Main outcomes and measures

          Jury verdict and rationale in response to structured questions. We transcribed audio-recorded jury proceedings and identified central reasons for the jury’s decision.

          Results

          The women’s average age was 71.5 years. Participants were of diverse sociocultural backgrounds, with the sample designed to include women of lower levels of educational attainment. Both juries concluded by majority verdict (16–2 and 10–6) that BreastScreen should continue to send invitations and promote screening to their age group. Reasons given for the majority position include: (1) sending the invitations shows that society still cares about older women, empowers them to access preventive health services and recognises increasing and varied life expectancy; (2) screening provides women with information that enables choice and (3) if experts cannot agree, the conservative approach is to maintain the status quo until the evidence is clear. Reasons for the minority position were the potential for harms through overdiagnosis and misallocation of scarce health resources.

          Conclusions

          Preventive programmes such as mammography screening are likely to have significant symbolic value once they are socially embedded. Arguments for programme de-implementation emphasising declining benefit because of limited life expectancy and the risks of overdiagnosis seem unlikely to resonate with healthy older women. In situations where there is no consensus among experts on the value of established screening programmes, people may strongly prefer receiving information about their health and having the opportunity make their own choices.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of elderly women with breast cancer.

          The number of elderly patients with breast cancer is increasing. Limited age-related information available about this disease prompted this study. The study population was derived from 50828 and 256287 patients with invasive breast cancer in San Antonio breast cancer databases and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry, respectively. Tumor biologic and clinical characteristics, local and systemic therapies, and survival according to the patient's age were analyzed. Survival was also compared with that of age-matched women from the general population. In patients 55 years old or older, there was an association between increasing age at diagnosis and the presence of more favorable biologic characteristics of the tumor, including more tumors that express steroid receptors, lower proliferative rates, diploidy, normal p53, and absence of the expression of epidermal growth factor receptor and c-erbB2. In older patients with lymph node-negative disease and/or small tumors, the observed and expected survivals were almost identical. In the SEER registry, the 8-year survival of lymph node-negative patients relative to the expected survival of age-matched women from the general population was 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98-1. 04) for patients 70-74 years old, 1.06 (95% CI = 1.01-1.11) for patients 75-79 years old, and 1.09 (95% CI = 0.98-1.20) for patients 80-84 years old. In women 55 years old or older, advancing age is associated with more favorable tumor biology, and breast cancer survival in older women is similar to survival in the general population irrespective of disease status. This favorable outcome should be considered when making clinical decisions in older patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: a systematic review.

            Deliberative inclusive approaches, such as citizen juries, have been used to engage citizens on a range of issues in health care and public health. Researchers engaging with the public to inform policy and practice have adapted the citizen jury method in a variety of ways. The nature and impact of these adaptations has not been evaluated. We systematically searched Medline (PubMED), CINAHL and Scopus databases to identify deliberative inclusive methods, particularly citizens' juries and their adaptations, deployed in health research. Identified studies were evaluated focussing on principles associated with deliberative democracy: inclusivity, deliberation and active citizenship. We examined overall process, recruitment, evidence presentation, documentation and outputs in empirical studies, and the relationship of these elements to theoretical explications of deliberative inclusive methods. The search yielded 37 papers describing 66 citizens' juries. The review demonstrated that the citizens' jury model has been extensively adapted. Inclusivity has been operationalised with sampling strategies that aim to recruit representative juries, although these efforts have produced mixed results. Deliberation has been supported through use of steering committees and facilitators to promote fair interaction between jurors. Many juries were shorter duration than originally recommended, limiting opportunity for constructive dialogue. With respect to citizenship, few juries' rulings were considered by decision-making bodies thereby limiting transfer into policy and practice. Constraints in public policy process may preclude use of the 'ideal' citizens' jury with potential loss of an effective method for informed community engagement. Adapted citizens' jury models provide an alternative: however, this review demonstrates that special attention should be paid to recruitment, independent oversight, jury duration and moderation. Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Informed choice in mammography screening: a randomized trial of a decision aid for 70-year-old women.

              Many women who have participated in mammography screening are now approaching 70 years of age. These women are advised to consider both the benefits and harms of continuing to be screened. Doing so may be difficult for individual women, and there are no evaluated decision support tools to assist them. To assess the effect of a decision aid (DA) about whether to continue or stop mammography screening for women aged 70 years, a population-based, randomized controlled trial was conducted in New South Wales, Australia. Women aged 70 years who had regularly participated in mammography screening were eligible to participate in the trial. Women received a DA providing balanced, quantitative information or standard information available from the screening program. The main outcomes were the percentage of women making an informed choice about whether to continue or stop screening and the percentage of women participating in the screening. Women who received the DA (the intervention group) were better informed than the control group (mean increase in knowledge score out of 10, 2.62 for the intervention group vs 0.68 for the control group; P < .001), and a significantly greater percentage made an informed choice (73.5% vs 48.8%; P < .001). The DA did not increase anxiety and slightly reduced decisional conflict. There was no difference in the percentage of women who participated in screening within 1 month. This DA increased knowledge and assisted women to make an informed choice. It did not alter participation in screening. The DA is an effective way to assist women to make a decision about continuing mammography screening and seems to be a feasible intervention within a population screening program.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2018
                14 June 2018
                : 8
                : 6
                : e021174
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentResearch for Social Change , University of Wollongong , Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
                [2 ]Wiser Healthcare , Sydney, Australia
                [3 ]departmentSydney School of Public Health , University of Sydney , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [4 ]The Cancer Council Australia , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [5 ]departmentDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine , Monash University , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [6 ]departmentCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine , Bond University , Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
                [7 ]departmentHealth Economics Research Unit , University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen, UK
                [8 ]departmentHealth Services Research Unit , University of Aberdeen , Aberdeen, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Chris Degeling; degeling@ 123456uow.edu.au
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4279-3443
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5225-6639
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2617-8694
                Article
                bmjopen-2017-021174
                10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021174
                6009633
                29903796
                64c0639b-9841-4cf5-8cff-d293057e2a2d
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 13 December 2017
                : 18 May 2018
                : 24 May 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000925, National Health and Medical Research Council;
                Categories
                Health Policy
                Research
                1506
                1703
                1364
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                health policy,public health,mammography screening,overdiagnosis,deliberative methods
                Medicine
                health policy, public health, mammography screening, overdiagnosis, deliberative methods

                Comments

                Comment on this article